Yugoslav Wars WI

[Susano]

Searching through the forums, it seems that for some reason the Yugoslav Wars are not very well covered here. Which I find odd, because the wars have much PoD potential. Maybe it is due to the fact that most of it remembers it (well, the news coverage, but that was extensive), and thus are not as distanced to it as to other (earlier or less well covered) wars, but I dont think that should make the Wars taboo.

Also, I think, with the Wars having ended for 10 years now, it should also be sufficiently long ago to not set off a political discussion. Especially as I dont plan a WI on the Peace Forces (interstingly, all threads about the Yugoslav Wars are 1] about Bosnia and 2] about peacekeeping or diplomatic solutions, which both reinforce my point of the fist paragraph).

So... I was wondering: Is it any possible that the Serb factions could have won in the Yugoslav Wars? Partciualrily I mean the Croat and the Bosnian War, with the Republic of Serbian Krajina and the Republic of Srpska. Could they have archieved lasting victory? And if so, what would happen then? Reunifcation with Yugoslavia?

[Franz Josef II]

Weren't the Serbs in Bosnia looking to stay part of Greater Serbia?

Don't know if they wanted to be their own separate entity.

[Susano]

Oh, they wanted yes, but for a while Sprska and Krajina were (if troubled) de facto states. That they reunie with Serbia/Yugoslavia is one possibility, but not the only one. I dunno. Im just looking for something where the Serbs arent beaten back in every war, just to have a different outcome. But how exactly would such an outcome be?

[Aldroud]

Sure.

Without American intervention in two forms, Serbian victory was almost inevitable. Serbian forces only began to experience military defeats after the use of MPRI personnel to train the Croatian forces. This training, coupled with arming them with western weapons & doing the operational planning for the Croats turned the tide against the Serbian forces. Without the NATO intervention, it is believed that the Croat/Bosniak alliance would have pushed the Serbs far back from the current dividing line. No doubt the Croat/Bosniak alliance would have fallen apart then, with Croat forces seeking to unify their territory with Croatia.

The second event was the intervention of NATO, led by the US Army, after the Ohio accords were agreed to. This was the era after Desert Storm and no one was willing to put to the test whether the US would fight or not. We crossed over the Danub river in the height of flooding, something no one thought possible. That had alot to do with psychological impact.

[Susano]

Ehem. If memory serves, it was the French Airforce who intervened first, and not the US Armed Forces. However, lets not turn this into a political debatte.

Now, yes, without western aid things look bad for the Bosniaks and Croats, but is there any way to have them not have Western aid? Europe, and America, cant just ignore a war at their door step. At least the extensive media cover would care for that...

[Aldroud]

French and, more importantly, Dutch troops had been in Bosnia for years before the US led NATO intervention. They were not operating under NATO authority but UN and thus were pretty much toothless. Their rules of engagement prevented them from stopping ethnic cleansing such as the Srbnica massacre.

[Calgacus]

i don't know or care where the intervention came from, but i do think that any serb states would have had to rely on greater serb support for their existence, and would ultimately have merged into a greater serbia. this end to the war would have encouraged further aggression by serbia and other such countries, and IMO would have caused wars elsewhere (and more genocides)

[Wozza]

As I understand the "Bosnian" Serbs mostly came from Serbia.

The Serbs actually born in Bosnia tended to fight for the Bosnian government.

So much for a "civil war."

The Serbs should have been pounded to kingdom come in 1993. Ethnic cleansing and massacre is no longer acceptable in Europe.

[Calgacus]

well that is a bit of a generalisation - according to census information the bosnian serbs have been a large part of the bosnian population for a long time (45% in the immediate postwar period) and to say that the population of the republika srpska is a recent addition is simply not true.

indeed the proportion of serbs in bosnia actually fell over the last 30 years or so, from being the majority, to the muslims (bosniaks) being the majority, or at least the biggest group, i cant remember for sure.

and "pounding to kingdom come" i fear might not have worked all that well for a couple of reasons, one that things were (and are) very mixed up in bosnia and the areas around - battle lines were not very clear, two that we tried that one in iraq and elsewhere and no sign of it working as yet.

also, the reason things got so bad was that our governments did pretty much nothing. in fact they imposed sanctions on the newly independent nations - they should have recognised them and allowed arms trading, and things should have then been sorted out earlier - having said that, it's over now thank god, and the people there can rebuild. nothing new in the balkans.

[Susano]

Can we cut on the politcial discussion, "should haves" and political judgements now? Yesses, I thought 10 years was enough.

[Calgacus]

yeah, i think not enough - anything post-1990 is always going to be contentious.

[TheGrandVizier]

I thought once of a much worse Bosnian war with an earlier war in kosovo starting, and bosnia AND croatia blowing up too. Also a montenegrin revolt against serbia because they're not happy with the war.

[Susano]

Montenegro was at first supportive of Milosevic... one reason why Slovenia and coratia seceded because Serbia, after usurping the governments of Albania and Vojyvodina suddenly had, or could easily gain a majority in that council of states thing. I guess they only later becaome dissatsified with Milosevics disastrous politics...

So it seems the essential question is how to make the West care less about the wars...